Forget Libya, Congress is back Monday with its very own “no-fly zone” — the 2011 budget.

April Fools’ Day this Friday makes it official: The government will have come a full six months without permanent appropriations for not just domestic agencies but the Pentagon and two wars overseas. The threat of a shutdown looms greater with President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner still too hesitant or too vulnerable to embrace a deal. Yet for all the high stakes — affecting close to $1 trillion in nondefense spending over the next 10 years — the politics can be so high-school-like that it has spawned not one but two “Gangs of Six.”

Text Size

-

+

reset

VIDEO: Hill budget woes

POLITICO 44

A significant new White House proposal — appearing to double the $11 billion offer on the table — was being reviewed by Senate Democrats over the weekend in hopes that an agreement can still be reached with Boehner on a top-line number. But the harsh rhetoric Friday night suggests GOP leaders still fear a tea party rebellion. And the continued absence of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) from the talks makes it harder to predict a final deal before the next shutdown deadline of April 8. (See: White House preps budget counteroffer)

Obama and Democrats can blame only themselves for failing to do more last year. But Republicans have since compounded the problem, even as the ground has seemed to move under both parties’ feet.

When this fiscal year began last Oct. 1, the Congressional Budget Office was projecting a $565 billion baseline for nondefense appropriations — regardless of Obama’s requests. That’s already dropped this month to $540 billion, a $25 billion change worth $300 billion over 10 years. If Republicans succeed, the baseline would drop an additional $62 billion in 2011, or $690 billion through 2020, according to calculations by POLITICO. (See: Budget writers look for deals)

All together, that’s a change of almost $1 trillion, or 16 percent, which Democrats fear will leave a permanent scar on American government. Moreover, the cut will hit home in a half-year span, after agencies have been spending at a higher rate for the first six months. (See: McConnell lobbies for balanced budget)

Under the patchwork of continuing resolutions since October, the annualized rate of spending for the eight major domestic appropriations bills has run near $410 billion. That would drop to $290 billion for the remainder of this year — a nearly 30 percent reduction.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee recognized this problem and recommended cuts about half the size of those finally adopted to appease tea party forces. The administration’s new draft proposal, reflecting the influence of White House chief of staff Bill Daley, seeks to find common ground in this range by offering to bring total spending down to $1.058 trillion — about $70 billion below Obama’s initial 2011 requests and within a few billion of the initial Appropriations mark.

Daley’s intervention is important, but the White House is hesitant to commit before a more positive signal from Boehner.

What would you say to someone who made $50 million in an industry in which 90 percent of his fellow union members made less than $5,000 per year?

How about someone whose last project grossed over $220 million but who hired nonunion workers to save money? Unions should be up in arms. People across the country should be protesting outside this guy's house. Commentators like Rachel Maddow should be raining condemnation on his head in disgust over the growing gap between the wealthy and the poor in America.

Advertisement

He should be the left's poster boy for all that is wrong with our country. But what if the person who does such things is Michigan's own Michael Moore?

Moore has made himself infamous by making outrageous documentaries and ridiculous statements. In his latest tirades, he told GritTV that the wealthy's income should be nationalized. All property, income and wealth should be thought of as belonging to "the people," he said, rather than any one person. Moore's budget analysis

The state of Wisconsin, for example, isn't broke, Moore says. The wealth is just congealed in the hands of a few and the state needs to take it from them on behalf of the people.

Of course, this is nothing new. Karl Marx believed the same and so have other purveyors of communism for decades.

What's new about Moore is the sheer hypocrisy of his statements.

Having just completed renovations on a multimillion-dollar vacation home in Torch Lake, Moore showed up in Wisconsin telling union workers he stands in solidarity with them. He then appeared on Maddow's show spewing trumped-up anger against rich people, saying that they need to be handcuffed and taken to jail. He even brought handcuffs as a prop, in case we weren't getting the message.

He has now put the crosshairs on Michigan and its reform-minded Gov. Rick Snyder.

We could argue the economics and constitutionality of his demands if not for this simple fact: Moore's personal wealth puts him at the top of the heap in the United States. What's worse is that he has made his $50 million by taking advantage of tragedies. In his 1989 documentary, "Roger and Me," he describes the economic pain felt by 30,000 General Motors employees who lost their jobs, positioning himself as the champion of the little guy. In theatrical box office alone, the film earned $7.7 million, with millions more from DVD and other sales. Not a blockbuster, but a decent enough start.

In his 2002 documentary, "Bowling for Columbine," Moore focused on the devastating violence unleashed in a Colorado school in 1999 as a means of examining violence in general in the United States. It brought him international attention and won numerous awards. His star began to rise, as did the balance in his checkbook. "Bowling for Columbine" made $58 million in theaters and tens of millions more in ancillary sales.

Moore's ship really came in with the terrorist attacks on 9/11. His 2004 film, "Fahrenheit 9/11," took a critical look at the presidency of George W. Bush and the war on terrorism. It turns out that rich people were behind it all. Big surprise. The movie became the highest-grossing documentary of all time, earning more than $220 million. Phony solidarity?

Moore will receive an income for the rest of his life from ongoing sales of his documentaries that will be manifold greater than that of any union worker with whom he is in solidarity.

Certainly the lion's share of the wealth he created for himself with his films would be taken from him and given to those whose lives were permanently changed. Let's start the negotiation at 90 percent.

If I were a betting man, I would put money on Moore's next documentary focusing on unions and the battle in Wisconsin. It may be that he isn't expressing moral outrage at the loss of union collective bargaining. It is more likely that he is merely doing promotion for his next project. I'm sure he will again make millions telling the story of people who have lost what they believe to be their rights.

I wonder if any of them will collectively bargain with him in advance for a portion of the money he will make telling their stories?

The government will have come a full six months without permanent appropriations for not just domestic agencies but the Pentagon and two wars overseas

But Republicans have since compounded the problem,

Come on Dave, whats it gonna be? First words out of the box you are setting this up to be republicans fault when we all know it started with the Wicked Which of the Swamps refusal to pursue the budget debate creating the very crisis that confronts us. Why, because government growing bills like Obamacare were sucking all the oxegen out of Washington. Had this adminisrtation passed a budget for the last two years in question we wouldnt be having this what should be an adult conversation. But now amist THREE wars overseas ( the third recently jammed down our throats much like Obamacare ), a natural disaster over another sea, and various disaters within our own borders man made and not, this administration never had the foresight or leadership to prepare for anything like the paper cuts in store for us today or tomorrow.

So, Dave, whens the currency bubble getting here and how are you planning to shift the blame on Republicans for that?

Red States are bad for America all around! Look at how they are contributing to future poverty states by their abstinence only education. They are setting this country backward a century. Conservatives, please move to afghanistan or iraq where your ilk reside and apparently thriving.

MR. ROGERS failing to do more last year?what do you mean they were trying to put a economy back together while republicans in the senate stalled and filibustered over 200 bills ,not to mention the small business bill they hacked to death in the name of the budget.Republican are point blank responsible and their intent was to stall and confuse the electorate until the election,well done, but payback is a mother and republicans are finding out the people have no time for the DITHERING they did last year in the name of ideology and have exposed their hind quarters the the burning sun of scrutiny ,it's gonna hurt this time.

Republicans have to be smart enough to take the cuts that they can get while not shutting down the government. Doing so will make them look irresponsible -- because the press and the general public, rightly or wrongly -- will blame the GOP. If the Republicans continue to chip away at excessive spending, they will continue to make the Democrats look irresponsible and improve their chances of winning in 2012. The reality is that with one of the two houses of Congress in GOP hands, while the Democrats have the Senate and White House (obviously), the GOP does not have the political firepower yet to bring about the changes they want to bring about. The question is whether the tea party people are smart enough to realize this and savvy enough to take a deal now that will position the issues beneficially for 2012.

obambee the deer in the headlight is a LIAR and a LOSER. 2012 can not come one day to soon to throw the obamacrats out of office. reid, pelosi and obama have controlled Congress for 4 years and it has been devstating to the United States of America. obambee does not represent a majority of the voters/taxpayers/citizens.